The Pentagon Wants Your Secrets 540
Teknogeek was one of the many readers to point out today's New York Times report on what one submitter dubbed "Son of Carnivore." "This should scare you: Vice Admiral John Poindexter wants to create a supercomputer capable of hunting through electronic databases all over the world, looking for suspected terrorists. According to the article, Poindexter outlines a need to '"break down the stovepipes' that separate commercial and government databases, allowing teams of intelligence analysts to hunt for hidden patterns of activity with powerful computers.'" Update: 11/10 16:15 GMT by T : Here's an updated link to the (no-registration) Arizona Star. Update: 11/24 17:42 GMT by T : Thanks to expiring links, here's another updated link to the NYTimes story.
wait... (Score:3, Funny)
darpa.mil/iao (Score:5, Interesting)
Poindexter is no Poindexter (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Poindexter is no Poindexter (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Poindexter is no Poindexter (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Poindexter is no Poindexter (Score:5, Insightful)
First of all we have the right to privacy. The constitution never says directly that we have this right but the supreme court has made it clear, to have all of our other rights to speech as well as other we must have privacy.
Because we have the right to privacy we should be able to exercise our right and be able to actually keep some privacy. Exercising your rights is not groudns for probably cause, that has been defended over and over again up to the Supreme Court.
I do care if they flag me as a terrorist. Even though i also have no intention of becoming a terrorist who knows what will be defined as terrorism. Read Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau [indiana.edu], he explains that going against the goverment is patriotism at its best and only when you stand up for yourself even while encarcerated you will be more free than any iron bars can ever lock down. Civil Disobediance open with a quote and i will end with it; "That government is best which governs least".
Re:Poindexter is no Poindexter (Score:2)
Meanwhile in a government office at a hidden location
#./findTerrorists.pl becoming terrorist
>Initiating search with defined parameters
>Combing slashdot
--> Found! packeteer = 566398
--> Getting user info from CowboyOTerroristBasher
--> sendmail FBI agents
Re:Poindexter is no Poindexter (Score:3, Insightful)
Regarding privacy, it's not explicit, but is covered somewhat by "unreasonable searches and seizures" in IV, "deprived of life, liberty..." in V, and most importantly in IX:
"The enumeration
Even if I don't like the other potential drivel the courts might spout, I'll gladly take an "interpretation" that provides a precedent for a right to reasonable privacy.
Re:Poindexter is no Poindexter (Score:5, Insightful)
1) The people in control of our National Security here in the United States are absolute morons. They believe this technology will help the catch terrorists because they think terrorist groups make travel arrangements through priceline.com.
2) They believe that the American people are absolute morons. They know this technology will not help at all in fighting terrorism. They just see it as an opportunity to invade their citizens privacy and think the average American will fall for the "war on terror" argument.
I am not sure which I am more scared of.
Re:Poindexter is no Poindexter (Score:2)
IS it a two way deal (Score:4, Interesting)
I think they probably mean all your data belong to us.
I doubt it would be a two way deal allowing teams of private "intelligence analysts" to search the governments databases.
Re:IS it a two way deal (Score:2)
I'd like to watch a thousand cable channels... (Score:3, Interesting)
Bad Religion knew it all along. Listen to Bad Religion, and you'll be able to predict Slashdot's next article. Good luck, and may the force be with you.
Re:I'd like to watch a thousand cable channels... (Score:5, Insightful)
Our only consolation is that if this Poindexter fellow, and the whole totalitarian government in place these days came to conquer us, then while they may be king for a day, they too will deteriorate and quickly fade away.
Of course, here on Slashdot, our 21st Century digital boys will cheerlead the front against tyranny, but will rarely lend a helping hand except to mirror a /.ed site off their parent's cable line.
Wake up to New America, people! Forget your mass hysteria!
(I'm not mocking them either--Greg Graffin is really on top of his ballgame)
Listening to Bad Religion? (Score:2)
Scary Quote from Article (Score:4, Insightful)
I have no doubt that Bush will persuade congress to give federal departments these powers.
Re:Scary Quote from Article (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Scary Quote from Article (Score:4, Funny)
Two words: tax breaks.
Re:Scary Quote from Article (Score:3, Insightful)
I doubt Bush will have to try very hard. Congress seems fairly anxious to do things like this already.
Checks and Balances? (Score:5, Interesting)
Incidentally, any attempt to turn this into a some kind of anti-Republican rant will be easily refuted with the long list of politicians on BOTH sides of the aisle who favor a stronger government and weaker individual liberties.
Re:Checks and Balances? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Scary Quote from Article (Score:3, Informative)
From Jan 21st 1993 to Jan 8th 1995 the Senate and House were strongly Democrat and a Democrat was President.
The Clinton White House thought that they could run wild in 93-94 with control of both Congress and the White House.
It was very difficult, even with control of the Senate and House to accomplish anything.
Just because a Senator or Representative has a D or an R after thier name DOES NOT mean they will tow a party line.
Look at the Impeachment of Clinton, the Senate was in Republican control and they couldn't get the votes to find him guilty.
Many things in the Senate will take a 2/3rds Majority, which will mean getting 15 or more Democrats to vote thier way.
The House may come up with a Bill that the Senate just doesn't like, it's much harder to get the Senate to agree to a Bill than the House.
Senators are more elite than the Represenatives, even if that house has less power, and Senators are more likely to push thier State's view than a Representative, if you get someone like Hatch to oppose something, it won't pass.
Don't think for a second if the GOP control of both houses will make things a cake walk for the President from a Lawmaking point of view.
It will help with getting Judges and Justices appointed, but laws are another story.
Since im at the karma cap... (Score:2)
You know... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:You know... (Score:2)
Re:You know... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:You know... (Score:5, Insightful)
aww no.. (Score:2, Funny)
Poindexter? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Poindexter? (Score:3, Insightful)
http://www.solai.com/forum/articles/tnoah-1.htm
Yes, it's the Iran/Contra Poindexter (Score:5, Informative)
See the Independent Counsel's Report on Iran-Contra [fas.org]: "Poindexter in April 1990 was convicted by a jury on five felony counts of conspiracy, false statements, destruction and removal of records and obstruction of Congress. The Court of Appeals reversed his conviction in November 1991 on the immunized testimony issue."
The White House has defended Poindexter's current role. [govexec.com] When asked in a February 25 press conference about the new appointment, White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer said, "Admiral Poindexter is somebody who this administration thinks is an outstanding American, an outstanding citizen, who has done a very good job in what he has done for our country, serving the military." He was then asked by veteran White House reporter Helen Thomas, "How can you say that, when he told Colonel [Oliver] North to lie?" Fleischer disagreed and said, "I understand. The president thinks that Admiral Poindexter has served our nation very well."
This is a real worry. It hasn't appeared much in the mainstream press, either.
Re:Yes, it's the Iran/Contra Poindexter (Score:3, Interesting)
Scary. (Score:5, Insightful)
When you operate above the law, there's really nothing stopping you, except from being giving the privilage in the first place.
just my 2cents.
Imagine (Score:5, Interesting)
Just think how much fun this would have been had it been possible during the commie hunting McCarthy era?
I'm wondering if the US is about to enter another one, except with "terrorists" instead of "commies".
With modern information databases, that can get very very scary indeed.
- Muggins the Mad
Too Late (Score:2)
Just look around, its pretty obvious
The next era (Score:5, Insightful)
It doesn't matter if we're about to enter such an era. The next round of government paranoia an abuse could even be decades off. But once we have systems like this in place and accepted as a legitimate tool of government, the key ingredients will be ready and waiting for the proper catalyst.
Re:Imagine (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Imagine (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the comparison to Germany is quite appropriate. Instead of actually talking about the real reasons such deranged terrorists are targeting us (among other things, the fact that we let dictators and multinationals run roughshod over the rights of the poor of other countries without doing anything to help achieve real justice, and in many cases with active complicity in the crimes), our boy George spends all of his time waxing eloquent about how they're evil and jealous of our success. Talk about no sense of reality.
Does that mean I think the terrorists were justified? Hell fucking no. Does it mean that I think there are real reasons that they use to justify their unjustifiable actions, reasons which we could actually do something about? Hell yes. And I'm really angry to see our President have his head so far up his ass as to appoint a convicted felon to attack MY privacy in the name of his witch hunt.
Re:Imagine (Score:5, Interesting)
So we should be invading Iraq so we can stop a dictator from running roughshod other the rights of the poor of his country?
THe comparison to Germany is not appropriate. Unlike Poland, Iraq has agreed to a UN resolution that said they would unilatteraly disarm. Did they? No. So we have waited around for 10 years waiting for Iraq to live up to their agreements. How much longer should we wait around? Long enough for him to develop the weapons of mass destruction that he is legally bound to not possess.
If you think that we should not invade Iraq or not get the United Nations to unanomously agree to tell them they have one last chance to follow the UN resolutions, what should we do? I have heard many on the Left decry that the US is going alone, and now that the UN has passed a resolution, that the US controls the UN. I have yet hear what a comprehensive solution as to what should be done.
Re:Imagine (Score:3, Interesting)
It was a war. They lost big time. The cease fire isn't meant to come up with terms they both agree to, it's to come up with terms the world (it was UN decision) could live with vs. continuing to pummel Iraq and terms Iraq would agree to to keep from continuing to be pummeled. Iraq agreed with them, period. The lack of a cease fire would have simply meant Iraq would have had to completely and unilaterally surrender (which would have been preferable, IMHO). I really didn't see any need for this new UN stuff, they violated the cease fire.. as far as I'm concerned that means the 'war' from '91 was still on.
That being said, I don't think Poindexter belongs anywhere NEAR the government or holding any position within it. Period. Iran Contra should have sealed his fate. And this idea only seems to continue to highlight that he doesn't understand the military serves the civilian population. That's the reason the military is permitted no operational capabilities in the U.S. except under rare rare rare circumstances. And it should stay that way.
Re:Imagine (Score:3, Informative)
Oh? When did Al Qaeda take responsibility for
the WTC implosions? Did I miss something?
I thought it was paid for by the Pakistani
intelligence service (the director of which wired
Mohammed Atta 100,000$ a week before, and then
went to the U.S. to meet with CIA and Senators
on the 11th of September, if the Washington Post
is to be believed).
As I recall, Tony Blair's dossier of "evidence"
presented to Parliament to justify the invasion
of Pipelineistan contained approximately NO
evidence of a connection between bin Laden and
the Saudi and Egyptian passengers who the FBI
claimed hijacked the planes on 2001/9/11.
Re:Imagine (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Imagine (Score:3, Insightful)
Which country is it again, that keeps threatening to invade if its demands aren't met? Who is a threat to world peace?
Alert: INCOMPLETE ARTICLE! (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/09/politics/09CO
(it's more than twice as long, with much more information)
Re:Alert: INCOMPLETE ARTICLE! (Score:3, Interesting)
What ?? (Score:5, Insightful)
How can you possibly identify terrorists by searching thru say, Amazon purchases or ubid or ebay ?
If you bought a 101 explosives book, and purchased some potassium chlorate from ebay you are surely on their list, but c'mon
C'mon
I think the US should change thier anthem .. (Score:2)
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?
Is it still the land of the free ?
Re:What ?? (Score:2)
Consider, if you will, the fact that we all leave huge electronic trails of information behind us in our day-to-day lives. This information CAN be mined for useful "signal" in the noise. Consider tracking back through all of Zacarias Moussoui's electronic purchases, etc and finding the fact that he was in the same hotel with four other men who recently entered the country from Yemen the previous week. This is the kind of thing that (believe it or not) is virtually impossible to accomplish today.
And none of it need involve the internet... Remember, virtually everything we do these days involves computers!
They want to do this... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:What ?? (Score:2)
Now. I want you to explain to me who the fuck believes this? There isn't ANYONE on the fucking planet that has 10,000 pounds of Hash, if they did, they certainly wouldn't want to have Stinger missles.
They are invading our privacy in libraries. Rye bread anyone?
Re:What ?? (Score:2)
so, they would like a highly capable supercomputer to do this, frankly, i don't think that tech exists yet(super-aware-ai, or computer running billion seperate ai's or something like that, that would have enough intuition and intelligency to seperate the terrorists from normal people).
yes i'm slightly aware deus ex uses already proposed conspiracy theories from which it inspires it's story, or that somebody could believe a system like this to exist.
Re:What ?? (Score:2)
Introducing T2T!
Terrorist-to-Terrorist is the way to consolidate your efforts with terror cells around the world!! Get the inside line on what raw materials and services are available from organizations like yours worldwide! Make contacts in explosives, nuclear devices, communications services, and smuggling rings! Offer your services on our boards! Sign up your group today!!
'sa joke. really.
--mandi
Somewhere in Maryland.. (Score:5, Funny)
...an NSA scientist ponders; "We need another one?"
Want to fight this? Support the EFF. (Score:5, Informative)
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) was created to defend our rights to think, speak, and share our ideas, thoughts, and needs using new technologies, such as the Internet and the World Wide Web. EFF is the first to identify threats to our basic rights online and to advocate on behalf of free expression in the digital age.
Other than bitching about it on /., you can take action, and join this organization which will help fight against this type of privacy invasion.
Is this the same Poindexter that.. (Score:3, Interesting)
I saw parts of this guy's testimony on Bill Moyers (yes, I watch PBS). Sounded like a total and complete criminal, especially with Bill Moyers' unforgiving yet true commentary.
Doesn't Anyone realize what's happening? (Score:5, Insightful)
Once systems like this are in place and capture a few terrorists, why not use them to nab dead beat dads, or to make sure that your parking tickets are paid, or better yet, introduce some statistical programs to raise little red flags at the pentagon whenever certain triggers are tripped.
I can see it now, subject buys copy of Mein Kampf, visits a Nazi website, and in come the agents to find a 18 year old writing a history freshman paper.
But what do YOU have to worry about? you aren't hiding anything, ARE YOU?
Next thing you know, they'll take my thoughts away... --Dave Mustaine
there's suprises then stuff that isn't surprising (Score:4, Interesting)
Uhh, that's cool. really. You do this all the time huh, and it's all on the up and up? cool. would you please to reveal the actual for-real names and addys of the people who knew about 9-11 ahead of time enough to put in all those "put options"? Ya know, one of those stories the mass media just seems to love to forget about and act like it never happened. The "magic bullet" of 9-11. Whoops, so sorry, I forgot we are supposed to forget that little detail. Oh what's that you say? Oh, the owner of the brokerage where the bulk of the puts were placed is the ex-#2 guy at the CIA? wow, whut_a_coincidence, I'm sure. Oh ya, excuse me, I thought we were looking for the al queda "terrorists" financiers and assorted hangers on. Connected fatcat western white guys in suits with titles don't count, do they? In fact, letting the cat outta the bag that they had a hand in it for a seriously dangerous political agenda, but got a little greedy and they thought they could slide by and skim a little off the top might be considered a "bad idea", correct? OK-We'll just forget about it then, it's just an embarrasing little incident. Nothing to see here now, move along.....
Disturbing trend (Score:5, Insightful)
Only in the real 1984 almost everyone enjoys being big brothered like that. Everyone cheering the government on should think about the fact that terrorists (short of a grand nuclear attack) have a minimal actual physical effect on the population (speaking of cold hard percent figures). The damage they do results not from the deaths they leave behind but from the fear they create. And this damage has been immense in the US. It is due to that damage, that we allow our government to watch and eventually control us like that. Those terrorists have been incredibly successfull.
new legislation proposed? (Score:5, Interesting)
Privacy act, my ass. The new legislation required is a repeal or negation of the fouth amendment. There are many good reasons the government must obtain a warrent by presenting reasonable evidence of wrongdoing in a public court to be able to search your personal effects and property. The FBI just had two agents busted for manipulating stock prices with information they obtained "terrorist hunting." Am I now going to believe that Uncle Sam will keep all my data confidential when any old clerk can get at it thanks to these broken "stove pipes"? There's not supposed to be ANY connection between my information or my company's information and the governement. Yet here's this bozo saying "All your base are belong to Uncle Sam". Chalk one more up for the errosion of the bill of rights. People without rights, who are stripped of the fruits of their labor (think income taxes) are also known as slaves.
Folks like Poindexter make me worry that my own government might actually set off a few small nukes to get their way. George Orwell predicted nuclear and civil wars would bring on the hyseria to build his nightmare society. Where is the conclusive proof indicating exactly who was responsible for September 11th? Why have we not seen it all presented and well documented? I'm getting sick of "security reasons" being used as an excuse for people to do whatever they want with out accountability. I don't care if that idiot, Ossoma Bin Laden, was happy to claim guilt. There must have been 1,000 others happy to do the same. I want public proof and the guilty punnished, not scape goats, censorship and loss of rights.
1984 and nuclear war (Score:3, Insightful)
The party goal was perpetual and absolute power maintianed by constant vigilence of thought word and deed of citizens, fear intimidation, hatred of the enemy, distrust of all but the party, and distruction of all emotion and loyalties exept towards the state. The Soviet Union came close to this ideal, but failed to develop the needed technology in time and failed to keep their subject from knowing that other societies had relatively better standards of living.
The remaining superpowers will take advantage of such technology as they can. Orwell bassed his predictions on carful study of human behavior exibited in India, UK, Spain and elsewhere. It is this nature he bassed his predictions on, not the technology. When the technology becomes available, it will be abused. That such abuses can openly be considered in the United States by high government officials and researchers is a tremendous blow to anyone who would argue that the US has special laws or attitudes that will protect us from human nature and Orwell's nighmare. The only thing that made the US any different was a relatively limitless frontier. Without such a frontier, the world will fall back to it's usual ways. With new technology, those ways will be more oppresive than you or I can really imagine.
Orwell also predicted that the superpowers would routinely bomb (non nuclear) their own population to maintain their hyseria. Indeed people do that kind of thing.
Democracy is the Answer (Score:2, Insightful)
Langdon Winner argued that Nuclear power would lead to a possible infringement of our civil rights and the growth of the state due to claims to dangers from Terrorism and Nuclear dangers and thus the government suggested fix being bigger more authoritarian government...
It seems that instead of Nuclear power, the Internet is becoming danger to modern society and a hotbed seething with evil-doers..
Rather than spending billions on these systems that will become white elephants and probably never work. Political action is required in terms of Nation building (eg Afghanistan) and working with the UN to proceduralise feelings of anger toward the US and engender a feeling of equity and fairness.
Re:Democracy is the Answer (Score:5, Insightful)
I bet (Score:2)
Poindexter IS a convicted felon (Score:5, Insightful)
Since he was released from his sentence, Poindexter has been working in private industry for a military consulting firm on EXACTLY the technology being proposed here. Setting aside the ethics of using your position to bebefit your former employer, is poindexter the man to decide what to do?
if we take admiral P at his word, that he never told ronny he was commiting crimes then we know he's a yahoo that cant be trusted to follow orders, laws or safegaurds on private information.
This is in keeping with the Bush admin's policy of appointing inappropriate people.
Sec DOE: Abrahams, only former experience was proposing in congress to eleminate the DOE.
Sec Interior: Gail norton, fromer mining industry lobbist
SEC head: former lobiest/lawyer for big 5 accounting firms.
Sec EPA: Christie Whitman, former govenor of NJ, reportedly accepts donations for chem industry.
Sec Labor: Can you even name the sec labor, do we still have one?
Sec Army: Former Enron top official, accepts free ski vacations from ENRON, then proposes to outsource the Utilities on Military bases to enron.
and so on....
Re:Poindexter IS a convicted felon (Score:2)
Also worth noting is the fact that he is NOT currently a political employee by the Bush Administration. Only the director of DARPA is. Program Managers (people who lead research efforts) are not.
Re:Poindexter IS a convicted felon (Score:5, Informative)
Almost (Score:5, Interesting)
In testimony before Congress, Poindexter took full responsibility for arranging the arms-for-hostages-and-funding-of-Rebels transactions that made up the core of the Iran Contra Affair [wikipedia.org]. He also admitted that he had withheld information and outright lied to Congress in the past, and displayed no particular remorse for his actions.
He's free today because he was granted immunity for his testimony. Prosecutors tried and convicted him anyway, but he managed to have the conviction reversed upon appeal based on this immunity agreement.
I don't wish to libel the distinguished gentelman, so I'll phrase this delicately. Many people are of the opinion that Mr. Poindexter occupies a government office today solely because he demonstrated intense loyalty to President Reagan, essentially falling on his sword and lying to protect the President from being implicated. Although other individuals involved in the Scandal testified that they had notified the President of their activities, Poindexter contradicted them all. In his testimony, Poindexter claimed that he'd initiated those actions to give the President deniability (although why the President would need deniability for actions he didn't authorize struck many as unusual.) That such an extremely disciplined military man would take it upon himself to arrange these actions without the President's approval is almost beyond belief. But with noone to counter Poindexter's testimony, the President avoided impeachment, a fact that most certainly wasn't forgotten in certain circles.
So this is the man who now occupies this extremely sensitive position, and is essentially building the most sophisticated surveillance network ever unleashed upon the people of the United States.
Here's the problems ... (Score:3, Insightful)
'The road to hell is paved in good intentions.'
The problem with these programs is that they open up a large possibility of abuse. I do think that if the government wants to enact these decisions there should be a way to invoke a "Right to privacy" act. And making it only possible to supercede such an act would have to be okayed by a judge. That way if you don't want your porn memberships to be public knowledge they don't have to be.
I say let the government do what they want, god knows they will anyways, but create a new "Citizens of Patriotism Act" protecting the right to privacy and safety.
The Pentagon wants MY secrets? (Score:3, Funny)
Under The Watchful Eye (Score:2, Interesting)
Poindexter Biography shows he can do this (Score:4, Informative)
M.S., Physics, California Institute of Technology, 1961
B.S., Engineering, U.S. Naval Academy, 1958 Experience Summary
Brings a unique blend of experience to problems from the highest levels of government to the laboratory. Demonstrated exceptional management and command ability ranging from naval operations to the national security of the United States. Noted for creative solutions to difficult issues and ability to quickly grasp the essence of new tasks. Goal oriented. Professional Background DARPA Information Awareness Office, Director 2002 - Present
The mission of the Information Awareness Office (IAO) is to imagine, develop, apply, integrate, demonstrate and transition information technologies, components, and prototype closed-loop information systems that will counter asymmetric threats (most notably, terrorist threats) by achieving total information awareness: enabling preemption; national security warning; and, national security decision making.
SYNTEK Technologies, Senior Vice President 1996 - 2002
SYNTEK is a small high technology firm with contracts in domestic and international defense and commercial business. Poindexter was responsible for high-level advice on management and direction of information systems projects (for example Defense Advanced Research Project Agency's Project Genoa).
TP Systems, Inc., Co-founder 1990 - 1996
TP Systems was a software development firm specializing in commercial software for the IBM PC's and compatibles. Poindexter was the chief designer and programmer. Development included a symbolic debugger for multi-tasking environments, a BBS communications program plus numerous utility programs.
Elkins Group, Consultant 1993 - 1996
Elkins was a business alliance with Electronic Data Systems (EDS), has developed Elkins Interactive Training Network (EITN), a satellite based training delivery system that has world-wide marketing potential. Poindexter was the Chairman of the Maritime Advisory Committee and a member of the Board of Directors. He also provided advice on strategic planning.
Presearch, Inc., Senior Scientist 1988 - 1989 Presearch had primarily been involved with defense studies and analysis. Faced with anticipated defense budget reductions, Poindexter joined the firm to develop new
and so on. No where does he mention his crimes.
Poindexter has Computer Science Background (Score:2)
Re:Poindexter Biography shows he can do this (Score:2)
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
12:45 P.M. EST
MR. FLEISCHER: Good afternoon. I'll give you a report on the President's day, then I'll be happy to take any questions you have.
The President this morning had a briefing with the Central Intelligence Agency and the FBI, to go over the latest developments on the war on terrorism. On national security matters, convened a meeting of the National Security Council.
Early this morning, the President held an event on the South Lawn, where he promoted several energy efficient vehicles that are hybrid uses of cars. It's part of the President's overall energy program, which focuses on both conservation and on increased production of domestic energy sources.
Later today, the President will travel to participate in a live radio address in honor of the 60th annual celebration of the Voice of America. That will be an event here in Washington, at the Voice of America headquarters.
And the final public event on the President's schedule today is in the East Room, the President will meet with the governors, who are here for their annual National Governors' Association conference. The President's remarks will focus on the efforts the federal government is hoping to help states with -- homeland security, as well as focusing on education reform and on welfare reform.
That's a summary of the President's day. Helen.
Q Ari, why would this administration choose a man for couterterrorism who is so associated with the dark side of the Iran Contra scandal, Admiral Poindexter?
MR. FLEISCHER: When you say, choose him for counterterrorism, can you be more specific?
Q He's in the Pentagon, he's been appointed head of DARPA, which is a counterterrorist office, developing plans, demonstrations with information.
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm not aware of any appointment.
Q Yet.
MR. FLEISCHER: Let me just say about Admiral Poindexter, Admiral Poindexter is somebody who this administration thinks is an outstanding American and an outstanding citizen who has done a very good job in what he has done for our country, serving in the military.
Q How can you say that, when he told Colonel North to lie?
MR. FLEISCHER: Helen, I think your views on Iran Contra are well-known, but the President does believe that Admiral Poindexter served --
Q It isn't my view, this is the prosecutor for the United States.
MR. FLEISCHER: I understand. The President thinks that Admiral Poindexter has served our nation very well.
Q Really?
MR. FLEISCHER: That's the President's thoughts.
Q Do you know his record?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm sure you will inform me.
Q I don't have to, all you have to do is look it up.
Yeah right... (Score:2)
No chance, keep dreaming poindexter (how can someone like this have such a geeky name?)
Deal - If I can have a shell, and you too. (Score:2)
Lets have less privacy, not more of it!
Webcams in *every* toilet please.
Record all phone calls and have them made publicly available.
A URL for every email and a record of all my shopping would be a great help too.
Think of the possibilities.
Let's Open Source Our Lives, we've got nothing to hide.
Guess im scrwed (Score:5, Insightful)
Currently all legal activites, but depending on how they 'search' it comes up ' potential terrorist' and i get investigated. with no true probable cause.
Guess that puts me in the wrong catagory..
Nah, you have your freedom (Score:3)
Terrorism is a real problem and if we can catch a few of them bastards in exchange for causing you to hallucinate black helicopters, then I'm all for it.
Now I know you're protective of your rights and we all should be. But there is always an exchange between a certain about of security and a certain amount of privacy and the question shouldn't be wholly one-sided, a proposition that seems to thrill the slashdot audience. We must ask where's the balance.
Now let me attempt to toss away the rubish and rhetoric so common to politics that throws around words like "freedom" as if they mean anything outside of context and spiffy quotes by gentlemen we admire and I'll attempt to enter the light of clear thinking. To you and each one of you "freedom" seems synonymous with distrust or, even worse, you forget you are speaking about people altogether. That every three-letter acronym in the USA is run by our government which in turn are elected by us Americans and this must position some trust on their behalf. That the professionals that we, in effect, hire may be trusted and at some level are trying to do their jobs well and care about what they do enough to do a good job of it. Don't you think recent troubles with terrorism weigh more heavily on them than anyone else?
Otherwise, read my sig and take to heart. And let me know when the black helicopters come your way.
Re:Nah, you have your freedom (Score:3, Insightful)
Point being: to live in a free country, you will have to accept a few deaths you couldn't prevent because of the protection a free country garanties. The only way to prevent those deaths is by putting in place systems which deny you your rights. As they say, freedom does have it's price.
What the traditional media seem to leave out... (Score:5, Informative)
later convicted for his role in the Iran-Contra diversion of monies and coverup. Poindexter's conviction was overturned on appeal -- but don't let that fool you into thinking the appeal court cleared him. Instead of dismissing the conviction, they ordered a new trial. Luckily for the Admiral, President Bush the First pardoned him, obviating the retrial.
This is the sort of shady character we want implementing any sort of information system?? Have we decided that the only way to beat felons, thugs, and barbarians is to hire some of our own?
Public Info is just that - PUBLIC (Score:2)
So where is the real problem?
The mentallity that the proposed project hopes to use against people is very similar to a way that the government manages it's information at time. Information A, B, and C may not be classified individually, but if say a document mentions A, B, and C it could be classified because putting the three together reveals too much.
Posse Comitatus Act (Score:5, Informative)
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1385.html
Sec. 1385. - Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus
Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both
Now if Congress allows this, it's perfectly legal. I doubt it will happen, there are some privacy activists in the Senate and House.
http://www.homelandsecurity.org/journal/article
"The original 1878 Posse Comitatus Act was indeed passed with the intent of removing the Army from domestic law enforcement. Posse comitatus means "the power of the county," reflecting the inherent power of the old West county sheriff to call upon a posse of able-bodied men to supplement law enforcement assets and thereby maintain the peace. Following the Civil War, the Army had been used extensively throughout the South to maintain civil order, to enforce the policies of the Reconstruction era, and to ensure that any lingering sentiments of rebellion were crushed. However, in reaching those goals, the Army necessarily became involved in traditional police roles and in enforcing politically volatile Reconstruction-era policies. The stationing of federal troops at political events and polling places under the justification of maintaining domestic order became of increasing concern to Congress, which felt that the Army was becoming politicized and straying from its original national defense mission. The Posse Comitatus Act was passed to remove the Army from civilian law enforcement and to return it to its role of defending the borders of the United States."
http://www.dojgov.net/posse_comitatus_act.htm
http://law.wustl.edu/WULQ/75-2/752-10.html
Poindexter is a poindexter (Score:3, Informative)
Both Vice Adm. Poindexter and his horrible shrew of a wife are bland uninsightful drones. He has made a career out of mediocraty. Never willing to put himself or his career at risk for 'what's right', he's always done 'what's popular'. He is a perfect political animal.
Having many heros who served faithfully in the United States Navy, I am disgusted that this SOB has continued to hold positions of leadership in the modern Navy. I'm not sure how deep his level of involvement was with the Iran-Contra affair, but it wouldn't suprise me in the least to learn he lied and schemed to protect his own ass at the expense of honor and country. To beleive that he would head such a program and as the leader of the department have the integrity to protect the rights of Joe Citizen is something I can't even begin to imagine.
All your secrets are belong to us.
Fairly easy to implement (Score:5, Interesting)
See, everyone in the room is freaked out when they learn the company has over 300 pieces of data (including things like name, SSN, birth date, address, marital status, kids, cars, salary, credit history, home value, pets, etc.) on over 150 million people in the United States. I watched a room full of people all look at each other with a slight amount of fear and uncertainty in their eyes. Then out came the propaganda machine to try to set us at ease.
Now, current law prohibits this company from using marketing data in any kind of legal procedings, but that could easily change. The company uses extremely complex algorithms to consolidate data from different sources (which source for birthdate should we believe? how about home value?) into a single record. Client companies (such as stores, banks, etc.) can then take their own customer databases and match them up with the huge store of information that my former employer could provide.
The government could easily have major companies (like banks, car dealers, mortgage companies, grocery stores, gas stations, utility companies, etc.) tie their customer databases to the "master" database my ex-company provided. Tracking the daily activities of almost any given individual from that point would be depressingly simple.
Just thought I should warn you.
By the way, last I heard when I was still working there, that company is the only consumer data tracking company allowed to combine disparate data sources into a single "view" of an individual. Normally datamining companies are legally barred from doing this. If they get a data element from a particular source, then they must sell ALL the data elements from that source together. The place I worked at began the process before the law took effect, so the company was grandfathered in, so they can take income from one place, name and SSN from another, address from yet another, etc.
Be afraid.
Carnivore, Son Of Carnivore and... (Score:3, Informative)
"Once installed, the Magic Lantern creates a record of every time you press a key on the computer. It's all saved in plain text, and during the FBI's next secret visit to your home or office, that information is downloaded as the agents also pick up whatever other records and papers they find of interest."
A good article about it here:
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0222/he
Is it just me, or has privacy gone to hell in a handbasket?
corp crooks (Score:3, Funny)
Cryptome has a link as well (Score:3, Informative)
Re:This guy sounds like a real.... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:This guy sounds like a real.... (Score:3, Informative)
Poindexter was convicted during the Iran-Contra debacle. His conviction was overturned. Regardless, there's little reason any of that should preclude him from working in this area -- he has a PhD from Caltech, and has been working in the DARPA research arena for many years. He also has a deep understanding of the nature of intelligence gathering and what needs to be done to make it better.
I'd say,,, (Score:2)
Re:I'd say,,, (Score:2)
http://www.cnn.com/US/9807/23/cia.cocaine/
[note, this is a *Clinton Administration* report]
Furthermore, this kind of character assassination via innuendo is every bit as harmful as what most of the people are worried that this project would do!
Re:I'd say,,, (Score:3, Insightful)
It's also worth noting that, during said trial, his defense was essentially based upon the claim that he lied to Congress: he had claimed full responsibility for Iran-Contra before Congress, claiming that he had deliberately kept the president in the dark about his activities, while during trial he declared that he was innocent because he was just following the orders of the commander-in-chief. Either he lied to the court or he lied to Congress; neither possibility makes him seem particularly trustworthy. Regardless of his intelligence or experience, this is the sort of man that we really ought to be trying to keep out of the halls of power. At least, it seems so to me.
That's a good idea... (Score:2)
The problem is that it would be detected and outed quickly, so it would have to have clandestine links to the Pentagon -- though that could be going on now -- plus it would need something akin to a supercomputer to make sense of all the data.
I'll tell you what's so bad about this! (Score:5, Insightful)
They're so busy looking for some reason to suspect it won't take much for person X to paint person Y bad enough to have them carted off.
Sound like East Germany, Russia?
Capitalism is the new communism, all subcontracted out for profit.
Free America is the new oppressive prison state, it's big and you are not encouraged to see the walls.
Hope you are comfy.
Sam
Re:I'll tell you what's so bad about this! (Score:3, Insightful)
You're fine cos you're not any of the americans locked up in camp xray yet either.
Doesn't lack of respect for due process scare you? Or won't you still know what such a thing is when you need it for you?
Are you making your country or just living in the one made by people who have more motiviation for making it than you do. Guess who your country will end up belonging to? hHose who make it what it will become.
Sam
Sam
Re:what's so bad about this? (Score:2)
OK.
And what percentage of these comments do you think will cane this idea?
Right.
It's not just xenophobia/jealously/yadda yadda yaddda. Those who haven't contracted patriotism to a blinding degree can appreciate how daft this idea is.
Re:what's so bad about this? (Score:5, Insightful)
There's more than one problem here. First, who gets to define "terrorist"? One man's freedom figher is another man's terrorist. Find out what Reagan had to say about the Mujahadeen in the 80s, then think about what Bush said about the Taliban (one of the components of the Mujahadeen) in 2001.
Second "the Pentagon" is nominally prevented from law enforcement. If "the Pentagon" goes trawling for terrorists in the US civilian population a principle that has served the US very well goes by the wayside: the military and the navy get used against US citizens. The old USSR shows us the dangers of that path.
Thirdly, we risk a new McCarthyism: do we really want to reinstate guilt by association? There's an extra danger in what Poindexter proposes, too. Do we want the association made by buggy computer programs?
Fouth, we risk giving up an almost sacred principle, that of due process.
-- Thomas Jefferson.More High School Debating (Score:2)
If you attack me, I do. The gap between U.S. support of the Afghan mujahedin and al-Qaeda's propping up of the Taliban regime is the same as the time between the end of WWII and the rise of Japan and Germany as democratic economic powers. Times change, so do friends and enemies. Ignoring that and making high school debating points about alleged government inconsistencies is infantile.
BTW, due process applies if you fall under the protection of the U.S. Constitution. People who are at war with the U.S. (including U.S. citizens who go over to the other side) aren't entitled to it.
Re:what's so bad about this? (Score:5, Interesting)
So, if you are willing to stand up for the Bill of Rights--the 4th Amendment in this case--that makes you a pinko sympathizer?
People like you represent the rule of men, not the rule of law. I bet you couldn't even paraphrase the Bill of Rights in glowing generalities, let alone verbatim, and I would wager you've never even bothered to read the Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers.
No I don't (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, no I don't. I don't demand the government stop all terrorism. I don't demand the government stop all crime. I don't demand the government stop all war. I don't demand the government try to make life fair and perfect because the ONLY way that would happen is if the government could somehow minutely control every action of every citizen. I prefer NOT to live in such a police state.
Somehow, somewhere, someone thought that we should have both freedom and life should be fair. I'm sorry, but you have to pick one of the two and personally, I would rather have freedom, even if it means freedom for some idiot to shoot me. And I am perfectly willing to accept the consequences of freedom and not complain about it. Freedom means things won't be fair. Freedom means there will be abuses of rights and atrocities. However, I think the greater atrocity would be to live in a "safe" society where freedom is replaced by control. That's the only way the government could stop all terrorism or whatever other vice you pick.
That said, there should always be a balance between freedom and the stability that 'fairness' or 'security' brings. Choosing that balance is not trivial. However, just because you don't mind an instrusive government "protecting" you from terrorism doesn't mean others would rather risk violence in order to perserve certain freedoms.
URL-Addressed Data is Public (Score:2)